M
malgova.mango
Guest
My reply
Dear administrator!
Thanks for intervetnion, As I'm tied up with other things forgive my belated reply.
As for your well intentioned advice in other threads due to time limit I may not reply all, But I'll reply then and there when time permits. Please accept my apologies . Generally I agree with you and I'll pay heed to my language in my future postings.
Dear administrator!
Thanks for intervetnion, As I'm tied up with other things forgive my belated reply.
As for your well intentioned advice in other threads due to time limit I may not reply all, But I'll reply then and there when time permits. Please accept my apologies . Generally I agree with you and I'll pay heed to my language in my future postings.
Dear Sri Malgova.Mango,
I find that your response to Sri Nacchinarkiniyan is based on a lot of misinterpretations. It is important to understand any poster's views in the way they have presented it. Otherwise it creates room for misunderstanding.
So here is what I felt was inaccurate in your interpretation...
I don't believe Sri Nacchinarkiniyan was questioning this.
The first and third paragraph of the thread starter indeed states that caste system is thought by rishis and they developed it unmistakenly giving the idea that VARNADHARMA IS somebody or somegroups conception. Hence the above reply. But if you believe otherwise I can't hep it.
The very sanskrit alphabets are enough to tell that the akshara's are not from ordinary human intelligence but of Ishvara's.
This is your opinion. Alphabets in any language by themselves do not say anything. The meaning a language points to, makes it superior. And that is my opinion. The larger point is, this idea is debatable. Not an established fact as you seem to imply.
The aksharas came from "Maheshvarani Sutram" ofcourse, it is only believed and not a fact, that it came from Ishvara itself. But the very belief has sanctity and not to be dismissed slightly.
As far the beauty and supermacy of the sanskrit alphabets over the other languages, and whether it says something, please ask the erudite scholars, if you are interested in gaining knowledge. But if you are content with your "opinion" I've nothing to say.
As I clearly said - There are no room for arguments in facts. The "believes " by nature can't be questioned. Only if some twisting either in belief or fact occurs then there are arguments. If the poster believes that he has the logic to twist the believes or facts, then it is his responsibility to establish why he said so. Simply by saying "I think this is not the case...." only will create resentments.
Why Varnadharma is by birth - "Mahaperiva" clearly explains his arguments and I ve nothing more to say.
I don't think Sri Nacchinarkiniyan said the caste system was created for the benefit of the Brahmins. Please go back and read his posting.
No arguments about our forefathers.
No definetly not nor did I said he is, In the flow of reply it just came.
Many of them lived a simple life not because of circumstances but by choice, They clearly saw the pursuit of artha and kama alone should not dominate one's life. They showed us discipline (aacharam) is more important and set forth various samskaras. They also showed us upto what extent one should pursue for artha and kama . That's why we have Artha shastra and Kama sutra – isn't it?
We don't know this for a fact - to the best of my knowledge we don't have any research conducted on why they did what they did.
Artha shastra and Kama sutra are facts. The aacharams they asked us to pursue or facts.
I don't think only facts are to posted and believes have no room.
To say women should not read sanskrit and all is not as per vedic spirit. There may be breaches but it is not the spirit.
I read his entire posting. He hasn't mentioned anything about women.
Please carefully read again.
That's why for learning we go to godesses “Sarasvathi” . The seers are not only Males but also FEMALES. There are number of (“mantra drishta” in female also) . That we put down female is very absurd. Infact Mami's have more of a say than Mama's is it not true?
No questions about this.
Fine
The fittest will survive , why then only we strive.
But remember the intention of shastras is to set what is proper for a peaceful existence.
This is irrelevant to the point that Sri Nacchinarkiniyan was making.
This has relevancy , please read carefully again.
On heredity, “appankku pillai thappama piranthirukkiran” is the general rule. There may be exceptions. It is easy to pick up the necessary skill from a family than to go and learn something new. This is how it was for hundreds of year that is the norm. This modern education is only a new concept in practice for 50 or more years.
Social environment is at least as important as heredity. To say that one is just like one's father is to discount the influence of the many, many changes we have in society today.
If you could read this in relation the poster you will find some relevance.
If in out-of context way, you want to highlight this , of course it is very obvious.
A fisherman son even though he goes to school he is expected to do what for his livelihood .
A buisnessman son even though he goes to school he is expected to do what for his livelihood?
What is proper here? Could you please explain.
All this has changed or is in the process of changing. Please recognize that we are living in a very different world.
Same as the above reply.
Malgova.mango
Regards,
Chintana
Last edited by a moderator: